How to Blow Up a Pipeline has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 9, 2022. ( Reviewed version).

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

A fact from How to Blow Up a Pipeline appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 April 2021 ( check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that nonviolence advocate Tim DeChristopher described How to Blow Up a Pipeline by Andreas Malm as "a humble and nuanced case" for sabotaging fossil fuel infrastructure? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/How to Blow Up a Pipeline.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Climate change Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles Green Politics ( inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Green Politics, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Green PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject Green PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Green PoliticsGreen Politics articles Nonviolence ( inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nonviolence, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NonviolenceWikipedia:WikiProject NonviolenceTemplate:WikiProject NonviolenceNonviolence articles

This review is transcluded from Talk:How to Blow Up a Pipeline/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GhostRiver ( talk · contribs) 20:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello! I'll be taking a look at this article for the January 2022 GAN backlog drive. If you haven't already signed up, please feel free to join in! Although QPQ is not required, if you're feeling generous, I also have a list of GA nominations of my own right here.

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Infobox and lede

• Comma after "In the book"
  • Done
• "criticizes pacifism within the climate movement as well as "climate fatalism" outside it." → "criticizes both pacifism within the climate movement and "climate fatalism" outside of it."
  • Done
• Delink pacifism and sabotage in the second paragraph, as they were already linked above
  • Done

Background

• Don't use "spring 2018" as a descriptor, per MOS:SEASON
• Same with "summer of the same year"
  • These are Malm's own fault, since they're from an interview with him. I switched to "in the first half of 2018" and "later that year" since he's almost certainly referring to Northern Hemisphere seasons.
• ""was in total despair mode."" → ""was in total depair mode"." per MOS:LQ
  • Done
• "expected to be arguing" → "expected to argue"
  • Done
• Verso Books should be linked in the body
  • Done

Synopsis

Learning from Past Struggles

• Delink "non-violence", as it has already been linked above
  • Done

Breaking the Spell

• ""long and venerable tradition of sabotaging fossil fuel infrastructure,"" → ""long and venerable tradition of sabotaging fossil fuel infrastructure"," per MOS:LQ
  • Done
• ""insufficient politicisation of the climate crisis."" → ""insufficient politicisation of the climate crisis"." per MOS:LQ
  • Done
• ""we must insist on it being different in kind from the violence that hits a human (or an animal) in the face,"" → ""we must insist on it being different in kind from the violence that hits a human (or an animal) in the face"," per MOS:LQ
  • Done

Fighting Despair

• ""an eminently understandable emotional response to the crisis, but unserviceable as a response for a politics in it."" → ""an eminently understandable emotional response to the crisis, but unserviceable as a response for a politics in it"." per MOS:LQ
  • Done
• Continued LQ issues throughout: even if the end of a sentence is included in the quote, the period should only be inside the quote if the entire sentence is being quoted
  • Done

Reception

Reviews

• LQ issues noted above
  • Done
• "for blowing anything up" → "for creating explosions" as both a paraphrase and to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition
  • Done

By notable figures

• Good outside of LQ issues noted above
  • Issues fixed

Opposition

• LQ issues noted above
  • Issues fixed
• No comma needed after "in September 2021" unless you swap "and spoke" for "speaking"
  • Removed
• No need to add the specification about the New Yorker Radio Hour in the third paragraph, as it was already detailed in the second
  • Removed and reworded

Cover

• Good

References

• Good

General comments

• Images are properly licensed and relevant
• No stability concerns in the revision history
• Earwig tweaked out on me, but considering most of the quotes are direct, I'm going to AGF

That's all from me! Mostly minor, quick issues. Ping me with questions, and let me know when you're finished! — Ghost River 16:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks so much for the review and especially the MOS:LQ lessons, GhostRiver! Changes made. ezlev ( user/ tlk/ ctrbs) 17:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC) reply

I feel that LQ only really makes sense after you've had to correct yourself over and over (like lots of our MOS quirks). In any case, everything looks good on my end, passing now! — Ghost River 16:56, 9 January 2022 (UTC) reply